Pitt schedules two-game football series with Utah
TribLIVE Sports Videos
Pitt has agreed to a two-game football series starting in 2010 with Utah, which has ranked among the nation's best programs the past six seasons.
The Panthers will play at Utah Sept. 11, 2010 at Rice-Eccles Stadium in Salt Lake City in the first-ever regular-season meeting between the schools. The Utes will visit Heinz Field Oct. 15, 2011.
Pitt and Utah's only meeting came in the 2005 Fiesta Bowl, when the undefeated Utes beat the Panthers, 35-7.
Utah finished the 2008 season 13-0 and ranked No. 2 in the final Associated Press poll after beating Alabama, 31-17, in the Sugar Bowl. Utah plays in the Mountain West Conference, which is not a member of the BCS coalition. Utah has an impressive 59-16 record over the past six seasons.
"Pitt-Utah is one of those rarely played intersectional matchups that should be very appealing for our fans and national television," Pitt athletic director Steve Pederson said in a statement released by the university. "Utah has been one of college football's biggest winners over the past several years, giving us a challenging and compelling opponent."
Utah fills a void left when former Pitt athletic director Jeff Long allowed Clemson out of its two-game series with the Panthers, who now have one open date remaining on their 2010 schedule.
The Panthers will open at home in 2010 against New Hampshire on Sept. 4, then visit Utah Sept. 11, play host to Miami Sept. 25 and at Notre Dame Oct. 9. In 2011, Pitt will visit Iowa and play host to Buffalo, Maine, Utah and Notre Dame in a schedule that features eight games at Heinz Field.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Pleasant Hills Night Out attracts large crowd
- Steelers offensive linemen looking to build on strong 2013 finish
- Whitaker man to serve 2 life sentences for West Mifflin murders
- McKeesport councilman fined, given probation in gambling ring
- Strike remains possible for East Allegheny teachers
- Liriano, Pirates beat Giants, inch closer to lead in NL Central
- Starkey: Would one big move kill Pirates’ future?
- Pirates inquire about Red Sox LHP Lester
- Pirates think Mercer’s defense deserves more credit
- Former walk-ons may lose scholarships under Penn State’s Franklin
- PennDOT response fails to satisfy New Kensington’s safety concerns about Route 366